Am 20.05.2016 um 11:32 schrieb Joseph Van Riper:
>
> RE: Monolithic boost...
>
> This has worked okay for me. For a new boost release, I download the
> monolith, compile according to our standards, and make that release
> available to others on my team for integration with the rest of the
> product. I try to keep it up to date, to resolve any possible bugs, get
> new features, etc.

This is exactly my modus operandi and matches my experiences: get the
whole thing, clean it up, compile it, distribute it, and use it. It's as
easy as that. One exception: I build it from branches forked off from
the official git tags.

>
> RE: Dependencies...
>

In our build system (using MSBuild) taking a dependency on a particular
version of Boost takes no more than telling the version number of
choice. Want 1.5.7? Bam, here you get it. Want another one? Wait a
second - pleased to serve you. My colleagues want it as easy as
possible, fiddling with individual versions of every single library in
Boost that they might consume is no option. Simplicity and tested
interoperability wins hands down. Exploring another Boost.xyz library is
much easier if it is just there, tested and ready for consumption.

Just another sampling point of real life usage in our company in the
past seven years.